July 13, 2024: What Did America and the World Actually Witness?

What did America and the world witness on July 13, 2024, in the deeply red community of Butler Pennsylvania, home to 13,000, mostly strong "MAGA" supporters? It was more than an assassination attempt by the almost obligatory "lone wolf"  assassin we've come to expect in these situations.

Trump, who was in the midst of giving one of his usual rousing speeches to a eager crowd when several shots rang out (the exact number still being debated), wounding two attendees, killing a third, and piercing the upper portion of Trump's right ear and grazing his scalp.

At the near instant when the shooter, 20 year old Thomas Matthew Crooks, squeeze the trigger of his semi-automatic AR-15 style rifle, Trump had been looking to his right and leaning forward just slightly, when at the instant, too fractionally too late for Crooks to adjust his aim,  Trump turned his head  slightly forward, taking the hit in his ear.

Had Trump remained in the same position as he was when Crooks sighted him in through is rifle's scope,  the 5.56mm NATO style bullet would have slammed into the former president's head, hitting him just behind his right eye or temple area. The impact would have travelled  threw his brain and resulted in blowing off the back of Trump's head. All eerily reminiscent to the shot which killed President John Kennedy that tragic day  on November 22, 1963 in Dallas and catapulted Lee Harvey Oswald into history, forever linking him to the late president.

But, unlike Kennedy, the shooter missed, and Trump lived. The attempt, without a doubt, galvanized an already loyal legion of "MAGA" followers as no other event could,  it also moved thousands, if not millions, of undecided voters into Trump's camp, having all but guaranteed Trump's victory in November.

I think it's important as a reference point for non-gun aficionados to understand something about the weapon used to shot Trump since it will be talked about weeks and months ahead.  The rifle used by the would be assassin, Thomas Crooks, was an AR-15, made, in this case, by Defense Procurement Manufacturing Services ("DPMS"), the parent company of Palmetto State Armory (Trump visited there in 2023 on a campaign stop).   

The "AR" doesn't mean "assault rifle", but is the abbreviation of the name of the original manufacturer, ArmaLite, and is considered to be a modern sporting rifle. What sets it apart from other semi-automatic rifles is its unique military styling, which is nothing more than sales gimmick to make it look "cool".

The rifle is a semi-automatic, meaning you have to squeeze the trigger for each shot (a proficient shooter can shoot roughly 60 rounds in about a minute).  AR-15's can be easily refitted to shoot most types of ammo, however, the most common is the NATO style 5.56mm (.223 caliber) bullet.

Most AR-15's are sold with a 30 round magazine, however, drum magazines holding up to 100 rounds can be purchased and may be fitted with a variety of scopes for close up(1x magnification), intermediate (4x magnification), and long range shooting (5x magnification). They are slightly high in price, ranging from $800 to a $1000 dollars. 

They have a high muzzle velocity, creating a large air cavity or "cavitation" on impact, which results in massive internal injuries as the bullet tumbles through the body before existing, typically leaving a large gaping exit wound, which is probably the top reason mass murders tend to favor this type of rifle.

A great deal of finger pointing has been going on since the shooting, with various law enforcement agencies coming under extreme criticism for their failure to properly prepare in establishing a secure security perimeter and establishing a clear line of communications between the various law enforcement agencies along with specific designated coverage areas.

The Secret Service, whose duty is to protect government officials, claim to have checked out the roof used by the shooters about 30 minutes before the event began. They also claim that local police were responsible for securing the outer portion of the security bubble (which they've denied). They had previously advised the Secret Service that they didn't have enough officers to securing the outer ring, however, they did have available officers in the area working. 

Just prior to the assassination attempt, a local police officer spotted someone on the roof and attempted to investigate by climbing a ladder attached to the building. When he looked over onto the roof, Crooks allegedly  turned his rifle on him. The officer ducked and jumped down to avoid being shot in the face. Following the shooting, local law enforcement were around and inside of the same building looking for the shooter.

The Secret Service failed to employ surveillance drones, which are commonly used to provide a bird's eye view of the event and surrounding area. Another failure was taking advantage of securing the nearby high ground. Roughly 200 yards from the speaker's platform was the town water tower, the tallest structure in Butler, yet no one apparently thought of posting spotters there. As one commentator put it, "a 10 year old playing 'Call of Duty' would have known to post lookouts there".  

Additional criticisms have been made in how the Secret Service responded following the shooting. Their coverage of the former president seemed haphazard and cumbersome, especially when compared to the attempt on President Ronald Reagan's life by John Hinckley in 1981. Several of agents appeared confused and not sure of what to do. Had Crooks not been taken out, it's likely Trump could have been hit again.

There's an additional serious issue regarding a failure of communication and decision making leveled against the Secret Service. There were several similar posts on Gab, which were allegedly sent by the Secret Service sniper using Messenger. According to the text, he had the shooter lined up in his sights for two to three minutes and could clearly see the weapon. However, his repeated requests for authorization to fire were repeatedly denied.

Finally, after Crooks opened fire, the Secret Service sniper took his shot and killed Crooks, but, again, without authorization from his superior.  As a result, the text goes on to say, since he acted without approval he may face disciplinary measures.  What's not in question is that 20 minutes elapsed between the time Secret Service snipers spotted Crooks and when Crooks open fire.

Whether that story is true or not (I suspect the latter), what is beyond dispute is that the crowd repeatedly alerted law enforcement ---local and Secret Service---that there was someone on the roof who appeared to have a rifle and even point to his exact location on the roof.

Some in the crowd were actually able to record the shooter on the roof with their Smartphones just before the first shots rang out!  Yet, for some reason, no one in the Secret Service seemed inclined to act. A few event attendees reported that Secret Service officers seemed almost uninterested.  Most all of them failed to act  until after the shooting began.  Maybe it's just me, but I would prefer my security detail be a bit more proactive!

So, where does that leave us? Frankly, it leaves a key federal law enforcement agency with egg on their face and facing investigation by the Department of Justice. I suspect that members of Congress will also want a piece of that action, so expect a few Congressional hearings.

The head of the Secret Service, Kimberly Cheatle since September 2022, may also find herself unemployed (I suspect she'll quickly be given another high paying job in Washington). Besides, with an estimated net worth of $10 million dollars, I don't think any tears need be shed. A Congressional Oversight Committee has already summoned her to a investigatory hearing.

Ms. Cheatle joined the Secret Service in 1995 and was involved in the evacuation of Vice President Dick Cheney during the 9/11 attack. She was later assigned to Biden's protective detail during the Obama administration. From 2019 to 2022 Cheatle was the senior security director for PepsiCo's global security.

In 2021, she was given Presidential Rank Award by President Biden. In 2022, she was appointed Director of the Secret Service (as a side note, PepsiCo gave Democrats around 548K in 2020. Just saying). In a interview with CBS News in May 2023, Cheatle pointed out that there was 48% "departure rate" of Secret Service agents and administrative personnel.

Accordingly, the agency was henceforth going to redirect its focus to diversity with the aim of hiring more individuals of color and women (with a goal of having 30% women in the agency by 2030).  Even their website emphasizes diversity first and foremost. The performance of her agents on July 13th, made it obvious that the agency's primary goal should have been on recruiting the best qualified individuals rather than trying to meet quotas.

It also needs to reevaluate its mission and rededicate itself to start providing high performance training (including mandatory remedial training. To get an idea on how to implement that, she might want to talk to the Marines). The same can be said of the FBI, which has undergone as series of snafu's over the past decade or so. Law enforcement, judicial, and other non-policy making agencies need to focus on the job at hand and get out of the business of partisan politics.

Ms. Cheatle has stepped forward and acknowledged that her agency has failed.  As the boss, it's her job to accept responsibly for her agencies and its personnel. Nevertheless, all of the agencies continue to figure point. Ms. Cheatle is continuing to grasp at straws and now claiming for instance that the rise of the roof prevented them from taking any action previously, and yet their own sniper provide otherwise.  

Perhaps the least culpable is Butler's police department. They alerted the two federal agencies  that they didn't have the manpower needed that the job required. They provided who they could. However, they too failed in taking charge of the situation once the possible suspect was located. They could have immediately alert the security detail surrounding Trump in order to cover him and get the former president to a safe location.

As they acknowledged, one officer actually claimed up to roof but ducked down and left the scene. Why? It makes no sense. They could have swarmed the building using internal access ladders or immediately put an officer (or their own sharpshooter--who was present on the scene--on an adjacent roof and eliminated the threat.  

The FBI's "Response Team" was dispatched immediately to the Butler to assist with the investigation. They are also conducting their own inquiry of events as well along with the Department of Homeland Security's inspector general. The FBI has been in deep dodo with Trump and the Republicans since early on in Trump's administration. No doubt they're hoping to get back into Trump's good graces.

Lastly, perhaps the biggest beneficiary of all this is Trump himself. Trump has been saying for months that Biden and the Democrats were "out to get him". In a fundraising email sent out to supporters in May, Trump alleged that Biden had secretly approved of the FBI's use of "deadly force" against him.

He also claimed that two FBI agents tried to "kill him" in a raid on his Florida residence, Mar-a-Largo. in August 2022. Given the fanaticism of some of Trump's supporters, the event of July 13th was all the proof they need. If anything, the shooting attempt has only elevated "The Donald's" persona further into a near mythical status among the faithful.

Most of the politically motivated lawsuits against Trump have either been dropped or thrown out. The Supreme Court essentially gave him a "Get Out Of Jail" card when it recently ruled that a president could be charged with actions undertaken while in office.  Even many of those on the fence has slid on over to the red side of the grass.

Regardless, the attempted assassination of Donald Trump, coupled with Biden's dismal public appearances and lingering questions about his mental and physical health and retaining Kamala Harris on the ticket, may have all but sealed the reelection of Donald J Trump.

As for the American public and the world, we saw on vivid display the vindication of an individual many call a "depot", an "enemy of democracy" or a "potential American Hitler".  They've witnessed a nation in turmoil over alleged massive voter fraud and supposedly an attempted coup (or was it a "false flag"?).  They witnessed the end result of manufactured division and hatred created in earnest by the ruling Stat Quo some 15 years ago play out for all to see. 

They also vividly saw a near total failure of our federal law enforcement agencies to protect a former president and current presidential candidate, which just reenforces the image of a nation in decline and unable to adequately protect its past and possibly future president (whether that was intentional or just incompetence due to a lack of proper preparation remains to be determined. But what's beyond question is that this certainly hasn't been our "finest hour". 

We must remember that as Americans we have more in common with each other than not. The ruling class wants us divided. Divided and we're more easily manipulated and controlled. We are less focused on their dismantling of the Republic. Divided, even if we are aware of the destruction of our nation, we're to weak to act. Only by coming together can we save this country and restore our democratic Republic and Constitution to its original meaning.

If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps beat the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you!

Amber Rose Delivers "DANGEROUS" Speech at Republican National Convention

 

How Assassin Evaded Secret Service Security 

The Attempt on Trump's Life: The Real Story?

AR-15: The Blast Effect

Veteran sniper says it makes no sense no doubt in my mindthe shooter had help from somewhere with an agency

Trump shooting investigation gives FBI chance to dig itselfout of a deep hole with Republicans

Kimberly Cheatle

Crime, Race and Ethnicity in the United States: Where Are We Headed?

Since the beginning of 2023 there has been 15 mass shootings. As of April 10th, there has been 11,500 deaths due to gun violence and dozens of acts of mass violence ranging from the "takeover" of streets and intersections to the swarming and looting of local businesses.  In many cases, the police are simply outnumbered and outgunned. Meanwhile, police officers are either quitting or taking early retirement in droves, leaving cities severely shorthanded.

 As of March 7, 2023, there have been 63 police officers shot in the line of duty.That's up by 33% from 2021. Of those shot, 8 were killed by gunfire. 323 were shot in 2022. Also since the beginning of 2023, there have been 18 ambush-style attacks on police officers. Many were by individuals who had committed by a "bait" crime and waited not just for police officers to show up, but EMS or firefighters to arrive on the scene. There ambush-style attacks have resulted in 21 officers being shot, of which 3 were fatal. In 2022 there were 124 such attacks. The majority of these attacks occurred in Texas, Arizona, California, and Georgia.

According to a October 2022 Pew Research Report, 61% of registered voters said that violent crime was serious issue. 73% of Republicans said the violent crime was serious which needed to be address by Congress.  On the other side of the aisle, just 49% of Democrats saw violent crime as a serious issue. 34% of liberals in general considered violent crime was an issue which needed to be addressed by Congress. Bearing that mind, when we look at violent crime and race, we see an different picture.

According to the Pew survey, 81% of blacks, the majority of whom vote Democrat, saw violent crime as an issue which needs to be immediately addressed while 65% of Hispanics, who also tend to vote Democrat, also saw violent crime as a serious issue. Among whites, 56% also agreed. It's worth noting that just 33% of white Democrats agree with their fellow Hispanic and black Democrats.

On a related note, according to the most recent statistics regarding "hate crime" compiled by the FBI, since 2021 indicated that were 7,074 incidents of a hate crime reported. Of those, the majority---64.8%---were based on race or ethnicity. 15.6% were due to sexual orientation, and 13.3% were the result of the victim's religion.  3.6% were based on gender identity, 1.7% on disability, and 1% was solely on gender.

The report also indicted that 66.7% of the attacks were against individuals while 30% was on property and 3.3% of the attacks were generic. Just over 32% of the attacks were in or near the victim's home or place of work. 16.9% took place on a road, highway, street, sidewalk or alley. 8.1% happened at a school or on a college campus.

7% occurred in a parking lot or garage while 2.8% of the reported hate crimes were at restaurant or diner. 2.7%  took place in a park or public outdoor setting. Finally, 26.1% of the reported hate crimes happened at multiple locations.

When we look at the offenders, the FBI reported that 56.1% were white. 21.3% were black and 13.5% were unknown. When it came to the ethnicity of the offender rather than race, 7.6% were Hispanic or Latino. 8.9% were of multiple ethnicities, while the largest segment---28.1%---were simply unknown. Lastly 82.3% of the offenders were 18 years of age or older.

Using data from the 2021 FBI Uniform Crime Report, the Feds pointed out that while blacks make up just 13% of the U.S. population, they make up 33% of those arrested for non-fatal crimes which include robbery, aggravated assault, rape, and robbery. For more serious non-fatal violent crimes in which violence was used, they made up 36% of those arrested.

Hispanics comprise 18% of the U.S. population and yet are 21% of those arrested for serious non-fatal violent crimes. Whites make of 60% of the overall population and represent 46% of those arrested for non-fatal violent crimes and 39% of the more serious non-fatal violent crimes.  They also are perpetrators of 52% of the violent crimes. Victims were able to identify the race of their assailant in 85% of the cases.

When it came to multiple assailants, the average number of attackers were two, in which 43% of the assailants were black, 38% were white, and 16% were Hispanic. When there was a single attacker, 59% were white compared to 22% who were black and 14% who were Hispanic. As for Asians, they consistently had the lowest percentages of any group with an average of about 5% of crimes committed, which is in proportion to their 5.7% of the U.S. population. 

As most of you already know, the United States has the dubious honor of having the highest percentage of individuals behind bars of any industrialized nation with an average of 505 individuals per 100,000. However, among countries in general, the U.S. is sixth.

El Salvador is ranked first with 605 individuals per 100,000 behind bars. This followed by Rwanda with 580 per 100,000, Turkmenistan with 576, American Samoa with 538, and Cuba with 510. After the U.S., we have Panama's 478 per 100,000. By comparison, Turkey's infamous prison system has 374 while Russia has "only" 304 and Costa Rica, with 301, is among the lowest in the world.

When we examine the latest available information (2021) regarding the prison composition of U.S. prisons, the Prison Policy Initiative reports that the largest racial segment behind bars are blacks. As stated above, blacks make up roughly 13% of the total U.S. population. However, according to the report they comprise 38% of the total number of inmates.

The arrest rate of blacks compared to whites is 6,109 to 2,795 per 100,000 while the conviction and incarceration rate is an astonishing 2,306 to 450 per 100,000. They also make up 30% of those on parole. Hispanics are 30.2% of the prison population. Whites make up the majority of the inmate population with 57.5%. Asians are 1.4% of those behind bars while Native Americans make up 2.6%.

In terms of age, the largest segment are those between ages 36 and 40 at 17.7% of all inmates. This is followed closely by those ages 31 to 35 with 16.9% and those 41 to 45 at 16.7% of the prison population. Next in line are those between 46 and 50 who make up 11.8% of those behind bars. Ages 26 through 30 comprise 11.7% of those incarcerated.

When it comes to the crime, almost half of all federal prisoners---44.7%---got busted on drug charges. Weapons, arson, and explosives charges make up 21.7%. This is followed with 12% charged for sexual offense. Next are those busted on immigration violations. They make up 5.2% of inmates.

Extortion, bribery, and fraud make up 4.3%. Murder and other non-sexual violent crimes comprise 3.2% of federal inmates. 4.8% of inmates were convicted of burglary, larceny, and property offences charges. Robbery is 2.7% of prison population. The balance is made up of those serving time for wide range of charges such as bank robbery, embezzlement, criminal enterprises, and insurance fraud.

The majority of those sentenced to federal prison are slated to do 5 to 10 years (25.5%). 22.6% are sentenced to 10 to 15 years. Those incarcerated for 15 years but less that life make up 15.1%. Those doing up to 20 years make up 12.6% of the inmates. 9.8% are doing 1 to 3 years behind bars with 2.2% doing less than 2 years. Lifers make 2.5% of prisoners.

When it comes to gender, while women are 51% of the total U.S. population, they are only 6.8% of those serving time in a federal prison. Males are by far the largest group, making up 93.2%. The federal prison system doesn't keep track of those who identify of  a gender different from their birth certificate.

So, what does all this mean? The media, as well as those on the Far Left, claim that the majority of people shot and killed by police are those of color, and therefore, call for the total disarming of everyone.  In truth, whites are more likely than any other racial group of being shot by law enforcement.

In 2022 there was 1,097 individuals killed by the police. Of those, 225 were black while 125 were Hispanic. 22 were classified as "other", meaning Asian, Native American, or mixed race. 329 of those killed were white while the race of 321 were unrecorded or undetermined.  We have similar racial numbers going back to 2017. The only number of any real significance  is that the number of those shot and killed by police have continued to increase, from 981 in 2017 to 1097 as noted above.  

Using the FBI's most recent report of crimes committed by race and ethnicity, the "2019 Crime in the United States", there were over 6.8 million crimes committed in 2019. Of those, whites committed 69.4% of all crimes. However, the report also indicates that minorities, particularly blacks, were more likely than not to be stopped and ultimately arrested for a violent crime.  Is that due to institutional racism and "profiling"?

Not according to the report. It stated that blacks were responsible for 55.9% of all murders while whites made up 41.1%. The reminder were categorized as of "unknown" race/ethnicity. In looking at the victims, the report stated that 54.7% were black. Whites made up 32.3% and the victim's race of 3.1% of was undetermined or not listed.

When it came to violent assaults, non-Hispanic whites were likely to be the victim in half of the reported cases that didn't include a weapon. Black and Hispanic victims accounted to the majority of non-fatal firearm injuries.

Concerning robberies, whites victims and black offenders were 12 times more likely than not according to a National Crime Victimization Survey conducted in 2002. When it came to carjacking, blacks were the victim 56% of the time, followed by 21% of whites. Asians and Native Americans were carjacked 16% of the time.

It's worth noting that a 2009 Pew Hispanic Center report mentioned that Hispanics accounted for 40% of all sentenced federal offenders, while is triple their share of the population. Of this, 48% related to immigration issues, 37% for drug violations, and 15% for other crimes.

The 2019 FBI report added that while black youths made up 16% of the under 18 population, they were responsible for 52% of violent juvenile crime. Could this be a symptom of growing up in a single parent household? Perhaps. 64% of black juveniles live in a single parent household compared to 24% of white children and 15% of Asians. 40% of Hispanic kids also fell into this category.

Hispanic juveniles also made up 46.2% of all gang activity. Blacks comprised 35.3% while whites made up just 11.5%. 7% were of other or mixed racial groups. As indicated earlier, the reports stated that larger cities, suburban areas, as well as some smaller cities and towns were where the majority of these gangs were found.

The take away here is that all racial groups are affected by the rise in violent crime, but not equally. Whites are more likely than other groups to commit a crime, most being non-violent, in terms of raw numbers, but this owing to the size of the white population.  Blacks are overrepresented by percentage of population when it comes to offenders. They are also 3 times more likely to be arrested than not. However, blacks are also more likely than not to be the victim, especially if the offender is also black.

Hispanics, especially under the age of 18, are more likely than not to belong to gang. That's particularly so if they're male, come from a single parent home, and live in a urban environment. Next would be black youth (again applying the same criteria), followed by whites and Asians.

However, none of the data indicated that taking guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens would do little to reduce crime, especially violent crimes, but it would likely lead to an increase in potential victims. There's nothing criminals like better than easy pickings.

While tighter restrictions pertaining to gun ownership may slow the sale of certain types of guns, most offenders---85.8%--- acknowledged that they acquired their weapon either from a family member, friend, or the weapon had been stolen at the time it was acquired according to the U.S. Sentencing Commission. In addition, 95.6% of those arrested are given the recommended minimum sentence for the use of a firearm in carrying out a crime.

It should be noted that according to the DOJ, 79.1% of all weapons used in carrying out a crime were handguns. Rifles (including semiautomatics like the AR-15) comprised just 11.1%. Of those stolen, 20.5% were .38 caliber revolvers followed by .22 and .357 caliber revolvers  11.7% and 11.6% of the time respectively. 9mm semiautomatic handguns such as a Glock were next with 8%.

Instead of taking guns away from law abiding citizens, the emphasis needs to be on better gun security to reduce their access by criminals and out of the hands of children as well as mandatory firearms training to reduce accidental shootings.

Schools need to adopt better discipline standards in the classroom as well as implement additional programs for pre and after school activities. Curriculums need to include developing critical thinking skills and civics.  Adding community based volunteer programs would also help.

The Justice System needs to reevaluate how it treats juveniles arrested for crimes including shoplifting or bullying. Instead of slapping them on the wrist and letting the go, juveniles need to bear responsibility for their actions. There needs to be expanded rehabilitation programs for non-violent first offenders and tax credits for potential employers. In addition to more and better trained law enforcement,  there needs to be a regular presence in not just high crime areas, but in schools and government housing.

There needs to be an emphasis on keeping adult male parents in the household of their children. However, in the absence of a proper male role model, there needs to be more community based programs aimed at high risk children such as Big Brother/Sister programs. More job based programs also need to be introduced, including trade schools.

The approach we've been using since the 1970's obviously doesn't work anymore, if indeed it ever really worked. Only by instilling a sense of responsibility in youth of all races and ethnicity, better discipline in schools, and providing access to opportunities can we ever hope to reduce the current trend in violent crimes and produce more productive adults.  

 

If you want to know more about this article's topic, please check out the links below. If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps with the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you! 

 

FBI 2021 Hate Crime Statistics

U.S. DOJ Statistics on Race and Ethnicity of Violent CrimePerpetrators

Countries with the largest number of prisoners per 100,000of the national population as of January 2023

Prison Policy Initiative: Race and Ethnicity

Federal Bureau of Prisons: Inmate Age

Federal Bureau of Prisons: Inmate Statistics

Number of people shot to death by the police in the UnitedStates from 2017 to 2023 by race

Race and crime in the United States

DOJ: Guns Used in Crimes

National Institute of Justice: Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising

 

President Trump and the Mexican Wall

Presidential candidate Donald Trump promised us a wall. It was to be a wall which ran the length of the US-Mexico border ---1,933 miles--- and the Mexican Government was going to pay "100%" of it according to Trump. Well, we still want that wall, yet the President-elect hasn't said to much about it, although he is still putting together his Cabinet. I'm sure Mexico is still holding its breath, hoping that the promise of a wall to keep illegal immigrants out was just the usual campaign rhetoric---all bark and no bite. Of course, Mexico's current president, Enrique Pena, has said that they would never agree to paying for a wall they don't want and that if one was built, he would suspend trade to the US and hinted that Mexico would try to tear it down or circumvent the wall everywhere and every chance they could. Everyone knows that the Mexican drug cartels have dozens of well built tunnels running under the Mexican-US border from Texas to California (and then there's all the access points along the Gulf Coast, all California's coastline, and, of course, by air). Former Mexican President, Vicente Fox added a bit more drama by repeatedly stating that the US had "no right" to erect a barrier between the two countries and Mexicans had "every right to come and go as they pleased".

So, what's the latest? We know (at least by estimation) that there are currently just over 11 million illegals in the US, which is down from approximately 12 million a few years ago, and that number seems to be holding steady. Of that number, around 52% are Mexican, with the rest coming from other parts of Central and South America as well as from Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. The state's most affected include the usual suspects such as California, Oklahoma, Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, along with some surprises like Washington, New York, Louisiana, North Carolina, and Tennessee. The majority of these individuals are employed in low income, often manual labor jobs such as in the restaurant business (table busing, servers, cooks, dishwashers), fashion (seamstresses, pattern cutting), hospitality (maids, laundry), agriculture (farm hands, pickers), general construction (roofing, paving, painting/wallpaper hanging, framing) as well as tree trimming and auto mechanics.

Most are here because they were in search of a job, not a chance to start over as Americans as many proponents of open borders and amnesty claim. In fact, the overwhelming majority of illegal immigrants have openly stated that they have no intention to become a US Citizen, even if they had the opportunity to do so. Many have also stated that they have no interest in learning English (or if they do, just enough to get by: many depend on the few who are bilingual). Some have also insisted that their children be taught in Spanish only---no English. This means taxpayers are forced to pay for bilingual tutors as well as extra school books and material printed in Spanish. In addition, taxpayers are forced to pick up the costs for healthcare, which, again, calls for bilingual employees.

Although it is a criminal offense for employers to hire illegal immigrants, many do. Under the Obama Regime, the Department of Justice was ordered to curtail its enforcement efforts while the ICE and the US Border Patrol were both order to stand down (in some cases, they actually ordered to either look away or leave the area). We also saw the AG suing the State of Arizona for codifying and enforcing existing US immigration laws (the AG also took the unprecedented step of allowing a foreign government---Mexico---to take part in the lawsuit, and, of course, who could forget the monumental (and criminal) blunder by AG Eric Holder and the ATF with the 2009 - 2011 "Fast and Furious" fiasco which illegally sold weapons to Mexican criminals and drug cartels in the ill conceived effort to "track" the weapons.

Actually, I shouldn't say "ill conceived" since they proved fairly easy to track with the wounded or murdered DEA, ICE, and US Border Agents, not to mention innocent civilians. In my mind, both then Attorney General Eric Holder and the Director of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, who oversees Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) should have been fired and prosecuted for their actions while in office, but when your boss and buddy is the President of the United States, I guess you can get away with a lot (in all fairness, AG Eric Holder was cited for contempt by the Senate Judiciary Committee and the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which is a lot like a parent threatening a misbehaving child that they'll count to three if the bad behavior doesn't stop).

So, this brings us back to the wall. Its seems more and more likely that there will be no wall. Republican legislators have been cold to the idea ever since then candidate Trump first mentioned building a wall. Some represent states with large Hispanic populations, and, of course, politicians are always thinking about the next election. Legislators in California have made it abundantly clear that they could prevent any type of barrier to be built. Some have cited the impracticability of wall given that it would gave to close to 2000 miles long, plus include motion sensors (and I suspect drones) to monitor anyone trying to climb over it, as well as ground sensors to monitor any below surface digging, as well as regular patrols and fast response teams.

Of course, there is the question of what to do with all the illegals caught. Currently, most are booked, photographed, given a quick physical and meal, then bused or flown back to the home country where a few days or weeks later, everyone plays the same "hide and seek" game all over again. The only ones benefiting from this are "coyotes" or people smugglers who make a minimum of US $1000 a head and the drug cartels who persuade (or intimidate) a few to act as "mules" or drug smugglers in exchange for passage. A few may end up in jail---at the taxpayer's expense as always---where the team up with convicted gang and/or cartel members and learn a whole new set of "job skills". Countries like Mexico have no interest in stopping the illegal border crossings since it helps with their economic problems by reducing their unemployment numbers and the drain on their public assistance system (plus Mexico and Latin America has little to no middle class thanks to outdated socio-political-religious policies and norms). Secondly, most illegals in this country regularly send money back to their homeland which, again, helps their local economy. Lastly, there the notion that most of Western and Midwestern US actually "belong" to Mexico based on the mythical land of "Aztlan", as well as land acquired during the Mexican-American War between 1846 and 1848 following the Texas Revolution of 1836 and it annexation of 1845.

There's a lot of businesses who don't want a wall built either because they depend on the cheap...and unregulated labor. These are often the folks who'll work their employees for next to nothing for hours on ends and often in unimaginable conditions, but not always. Some are seasonal employers, especially farmers or those in the livestock or horse industry who need low skilled but dependable help. The pay isn't great but not that bad either. The work is often long, hot, sporadic and necessary. Labor unions too oppose restricting illegal immigration. Why? Because most are employed in low skilled blue collar jobs which are usually unionized. Unions hope these individuals join unions for no other reason than to build up their near empty coffers.

Finally, there are the religious institutions who believe they are "doing God's work" by ignoring federal, state and local laws by aiding illegals in their efforts to violate immigration laws; by providing short term shelter and food; by arranging for long term housing, employment, and assisting in getting around laws, especially when it comes to education for their children or obtaining medical care. In exchange, they get a future parishioner, donor and volunteer, as well as adding to their denominational clout. Thus, in short, it'll be a tough sell even for "The Donald". As for the pro-amnesty folks who like to "boo-hoo" about "tearing families apart", let's place them blame where it squarely belongs---on the violators themselves. They know their actions are illegal. They understand they are intentionally committing a crime. They know what the results will be if they're caught. They know what the right thing is they should do, be it for a seasonal, temporary, or long term job. Sorry, but pulling at the heartstrings just doesn't get it. They're the ones who are solely responsible for their decisions. It's like not jailing a bank robber because it's going to be hard on their family.

So, what can Trump actually do? Well, it's obvious that despite how good the sound bites were, there won't be a wall. As President, he can appoint an Attorney General and Director of the Department of Justice who will follow the law and do their job. He can ensure that there are ample ICE and Border Patrol Agents and they are adequately funded. He could have individuals caught grouped by origin and dumped at the nearest embassy (or bill each country for the expense which could be deducted annually from whatever loans we give them). Trump could ensure that all federal funding be stopped from an state, city, or institution which grants amnesty or aids illegals (in the case of non-profit institutions such as churches, they could face suspension or loss of their tax-exempt status). Education is in English, and so are all government documents; no federal funding provided otherwise. No further taxpayer paid medical care, unless it's for an emergency and hospitals, medical institutions, and healthcare workers cannot pass on costs to any federal agencies. Same goes for businesses---suspension of their business license and/or of any federal contracts, loans, or grants---who fail to assist any illegal worker not obtain a work permit or green card. In addition, each officer of the company is personally fined (it's a crime after all) along with the company itself.

Lastly, Trump can encourage and aid each offending nation rebuild their infrastructure and develop a stable middle class, provided they actively and demonstrably work to end the influx of illegals from their countries (after all, we give them millions if not billions every year, why not have them do something for us for a change?). It's not perfect or even ideal, but by allowing certain government agencies to do their jobs; by withholding federal funding from those in violation; by both penalizing and aiding the offending country, Trump can do a lot better than building a wall.


Trump's Mexico Border 'Wall' Vanishing as GOP Lawmakers Bolt
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-12-07/trump-s-wall-at-mexico-border-vanishing-as-gop-lawmakers-bolt


What is Aztlan, La Raza, MEChA
http://www.mayorno.com/WhoIsMecha.html


5 Facts about illegal Immigration in the U.S.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/03/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-u-s/


Operation Fast and Furious Fast Facts
http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/27/world/americas/operation-fast-and-furious-fast-facts/index.html


Judge to Janet Napolitano: You have to deport illegal immigrants
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/judge-to-janet-napolitano-you-have-to-deport-illegal-immigrants/article/2528019

How to Make Nations Disappear

I've always like magicians. Seriously, who doesn't? Be it clowns and card tricks or making 747's disappear. While I appreciate the illusions and the showmanship which goes into each performance, I've always found myself drawn to the act of the illusion itself. Perhaps it's the sleight of hand tricks that I enjoy the most---creating a believable situation, stating a "problem" and then presto chango, the "problem" re-manifest itself into some other form; be it a flower, coin, different card, or simply vanishes into thin

air. I think we, as spectators, are complicit in the illusion just as much as the magician. After all, we know it's a trick, yet we allow ourselves to believe by suspending our logic and reason and step, albeit briefly, into a world of make believe.

I think politics is a bit like magic too. We all see the problem. We know what our logic and reason tells us, yet, we are subtly drawn into a world of make believe by a media which manipulates the truth into something which sounds reasonable to many of us. The politicians use a verbal form of "sleight of hand" to lead us along a path where the roses have no thorns. Together, they create a world of illusion which promises one thing but delivers another while trying to convince us that it's the same as what we desire. I don't think we're to blame, at least not entirely. There's a part of us which wants to believe. We want to think that the individuals in office are looking out for us; that they have our best interests at heart, and yet, the logical portion of our brain tells us that we've just been hoodwinked in the way a magician seems to magically move coins from one pocket to another.

One of the tricks used most often by the media and politicians is misdirection. Have you ever noticed how we seem to go from crisis to crisis? We seem to always be jumping from one fire into another. The media treats each as if it's some earth shattering event given the "overkill" they devote to each; creating this feeding frenzy where they start citing each other's opinions and comments as if it's actually part of the story. Of course, there's the opposing pundits doing the same thing. Eventually, the public grows mind numbingly confused and loses interest out of frustration. Mission accomplished. But don't fret! We're soon off to the next big thing before we know it and the cycle repeats itself. Naturally, the politicians and their handlers are busy putting out their own spin. They're just as much a part of the media spin cycle as any of the talking heads.

Right now, we're being bombarded with stories about the poor refugees coming by makeshift boat or foot from war torn areas of the Middle East in search for a better and safer life (the majority are single young men not whole families). At least that's the storyline. We see pictures and video of these battered refugees confronting various military and police units who are either impeding their travels or herding them through like cattle. We are told, if the media mentions it at all, that most of these individuals are from Syria, Afghanistan and the East African nation of Eritrea. It's true that that most of the refugees are in fact coming from these areas, but many more are coming from surrounding areas not affected the hostilities. They're simply looking for an easy way out of the region.

We're also not being told that overwhelmingly these migrants are Moslem. Some are hoping to escape persecution by fellow Moslems (Sunni vs. Shiite, moderate or secular vs conservative or extremist). What we're not hearing much about are the Coptic Christians and Yazidis who are trying to get out of harm's way. These groups, along with the Kurds, are the region's most persecuted. While the media doesn't mention it, these groups are more likely to be murdered by extremists like ISIS than any of the other groups, who are at least Moslem. We also don't hear about the Christians, Yazidis, or Kurds who do make it to the refugee camps. Far from safe, they are often attacked and robbed by other refugees (who happen to be Moslem) and unfortunately, the authorities are much too busy to deal with it. Their attention is focused on being understaffed, a lack of housing, fresh water, food and ample sanitation (not to mention disease).

The media and politicians have been silent on the violence Europe is experiencing too. Since this mass exodus into places like Austria, Germany, France, Belgium, and Scandinavia, there are been several violent encounters with police over what is seen as "non-Sharia" compliance; from women's clothing to ringing church bells to food; a few Moslems have recently petitioned the Mayor of Munich and the City Council to end Oktoberfest and stop serving beer (alcoholic beverages are forbidden under Sharia law). No doubt they'll also demand that Germans stop eating pork which has been a staple of the German diet (along with beer) for centuries. German girls have been asked not to wear short skirts to school as not to "offend" the newly arrived Moslem children and their parents. Schools have been asked to remove crosses and other religious items as well. In addition, there has been outbreaks of violence between Moslems sects with centuries old hatreds, battling each other with rocks, bottles, and fists with the police seemingly powerless to combat it. Many admit they are heading for Europe because of promises of free housing, food, medical treatment, and yes, "willing blue eyed blonde women needing strong men" as one advertisement put it...I kid you not.

These are the tip of an iceberg which has collided with Europe. Not since the end of World War II has there been such a mass movement of people from one region to another, but I can take it one step further when I say that it's been since 1511, the last attempted invasion of Europe by Islam, has there been an influx of this many Moslems on European soil. At that, nearly all of Christendom had fallen under the banner of the Crescent Moon. To be fair, the chaos in the Middle East is largely the fault of the West; especially the United States. Yes, this cesspool of religious and ethnic hatred has been going on for centuries. However, it has generally remained localized. However, this time it was the blundering of Washington working hand-in-hand with corporate interests that has reopened Pandora's Box. This then is the sleight of hand orchestrated by politicians sitting in the United Nations and in the EU Parliament working hand-in-pocket with the media to portray an image that is only partially true while attempting to cover up the real truth---that Europe has been sold out.

Take a look at the US. For over 25 years we've been demanding an end to illegal immigration. We've been demanding a secure Southern border. We've been demanding an increase in border patrol agents and funding. We've been demanding stiffer penalties for employers and churches who smuggle and protect illegal immigrants. We've been demanding an increase in ICE funding and deportations. We've demanded widespread application of E-Verify. And what have we gotten for all those years? Well, we've gotten a partial amnesty courtesy of Ronald Reagan.

We've gotten lip service about building a wall and clamping down on employers of illegal immigrants. We've gotten a half hearted effort at applying E-Verify. We got a federal lawsuit against Arizona for enforcing existing federal immigration laws (and the unprecedented approval by the DOJ to allow a foreign government to interplead against a US State). We got an illegal gun deal ("Fast and Furious") perpetrated by the US Justice Department which resulted in the murders of US agents. We got so-called "sanctuary cities" which can pick and choose what federal laws to ignore, including refusal to cooperate with ICE agents. We got border patrol agents who were told to "stand down" and not do their jobs, resulting in agents being killed. We got states having to pick up the financial tab for medical treatment of illegals, of providing translators for schools and taxpayer based services. We got the re-introduction of long eradicated diseases. We got an increase in drug gangs and cartels. We got an end to deportations short of violent criminals (who simply re-enter a few days later). We got in-state tuition rates for illegals going to school (plus access to grants, housing, and taxpayer subsidized loans). Of course, we also got funerals as several---mostly women---were murdered not to mention other violent crimes.

You may also note that in nearly every instance when public outrage reached the boiling point, "something" always happened to divert the public's attention away. The greater the outrage, the longer the media focused on whatever that something was. Sometimes is was domestic like the economy and at other times its some manufactured "crisis" overseas. This is in essence the same diversion used by magicians in their sleight of hand acts; get the people to look somewhere else while hiding what you don't want them to see.

So who gains from this? Well, domestically, employers gain the most. They get individuals who are willing to work hard for sub-standard pay and little chance they'll complain. Employers can avoid taxes and having to offer benefits. There's no chance of unionization. Working conditions aren't a concern and neither are other niceties such as mandatory restroom or hourly breaks, limitation of hours, vacations, or even lunch breaks. In short, employees are barely a step up from slaves. Churches and other groups benefit by expanding their level of influence over the illegal immigrants (and perhaps a financial kickback down the road). In addition, these institutions benefit by making broader connections with those who'll partner with them in breaking the law through housing, medical treatment, and employment. Even in the case of legal immigration, employers expect to pay lower wages with few if any benefits. This influx of potential employees drives down wages as competition for jobs increase. Meanwhile, higher paying jobs are outsourced to lower paying companies overseas. Unions support amnesty for illegal immigration in the hopes they will fill the mostly lower paying jobs and fill empty union coffers. Plus the increase in union membership will, hopefully, restore at least a measure of organized labor's former clout.

Lastly, the foreign countries benefit. Most are struggling economically; limited to primarily an agricultural base, few ever developed a middle class thanks to a combination of limited education, a repressive Church hierarchy which discouraged economic self-improvement, and an upper class which controls the levers of power. Women are largely considered to be second class citizens, whose primary purpose is to marry, have children, and stay home. Many are "discouraged" from even voting. Of course, there's always the military and police which serve as enforcers of the status quo. Whenever there's been an attempt to reverse the trend, it's often brutally put down. On those rare occasions when a "Man of the People" has succeeded, they've been ousted by a coup and a military junta installed (mostly with the active support of the US Government coupled with sweetheart deals for a select few corporations). Such has been "democracy" corporate style!

As for Europe, I don't see who benefits from the overthrow of centuries of culture and tradition while disrupting the economies. Perhaps surrendering Europe is the price the West has to pay for access to oil, yet oil is available elsewhere. Perhaps subjugation of Europeans is better than a nuclear war; better a few hundred thousand die than millions and collapse the economies of the world. Certainly an eventual world war would eliminate what the elites call an "excess" global population given the decline in available fresh drinking water and high yield farm land. Not to mention a weakening of the West's resolve, declining population, and strong political leadership. Maybe too this is payback for the intervention of Western (mostly US) military forces at the behest of corporations into the Middle East to seize direct control of the oil fields and shipping lanes, not to mention expanding access to markets.

There's no doubt that the US is in decline as well. It lacks the full support of most countries, including former and current allies who note that the US has been unable to match its actions with its promises. American political leadership has become something between a global joke and a global embarrassment. The American People are fed up with Washington and the rumblings of fundamental change are growing ever louder. The economy has deep fissures and the crisis with illegal immigration is making them worse. Russia and China, on the other hand, have showed a willingness to step up and fill the gap being left by the US. Neither have any patience with Moslem extremists and have shown they are more than willing to use the same level of brutality. Perhaps that's what it will take. Imagine the irony of our Cold War arch-enemy Russia coming not just to the rescue of the West, but to ours as well. Talk about your sleight of hand. That would be the slickest trick of them all.